[zodmaner]

> Dump the decentralized model.

...and the author has lost me (I did read the entire post though).

> If GitHub is down today I can't deploy anyway so I might as well embrace the server requirement as a perk.

Just because you can't deploy doesn't mean others can't as well. (Also, GitHub != Git. Period.)

Heck, the entire idea of DVCS is that you should be able to continue to work even after the servers are down. If you can't, then it's not Git problem.

It seems that the author didn't even understand the concepts and ideas, or the rationals behind DVCS, let alone Git. As a someone who had lived through the period when SVN was the only game in town (and not wanting to return to those dark days), seeing the author pining for the "good 'ol days" of SVN-like, centralized VCS is just silly.

[keybored]

Yeah, the thing about us programmers is that we can build whatever stuff which is incompatible with the fundamental tool (centralized things vs. git(1)) on top of the tool and then complain that the tool has become useless. So it’s true that if you insist on having so much centralization that you become impotent once GitHub goes down, then yeah decentralization isn’t work for you—because you went out of your way to make it useless.